Coach Alastair Clarkson IV - HFC Racism Investigation Discussion

[Ocha905]

The Footy Gods never miss.

What did North do to deserve the last 8.5 years of agony, post the 10-1 start in 2016 until now?

 

[Ocha905]

But yeah it's pretty weird to have such a mirrored situation. Hoping for a speedy recovery for Mitchell.

 

[Del191229]

What did North do to deserve the last 8.5 years of agony, post the 10-1 start in 2016 until now?

Reap what we sowed and get really unlucky.

 

[Outtatym]

What did North do to deserve the last 8.5 years of agony, post the 10-1 start in 2016 until now?

Flicked boomer.

 

[amaz199]

I'm still so sickened by this whole thing.

How that club got away with this whole mess with just throwing money at things is an absolute disgrace.

Clarkson will never be the same human he once was before this whole debacle. Hawthorn have blood on their hands.

They should've been stripped of draft picks. They are an arrogant, ****wit-driven, horribly racist organisation (having appointed one as a president in the past mind you) then work with the AFL equally responsible for ****ing up this shit even more.

Clarkson should feel betrayed. I would. Imagine your whole tenure at a footy club tarnished by what transpired the last year or so. What an absolute mess.

And how convenient that the instant Clarko is owed his final year contract payout, this stuff comes out. It's almost like Jeff Kennett the absolute shit stain of a human being decided to give him another stress-inducing period so severe it pulled him away from the game.

How can someone get away with that?

 

[Hatchy1992]

I'm still so sickened by this whole thing.

How that club got away with this whole mess with just throwing money at things is an absolute disgrace.

Clarkson will never be the same human he once was before this whole debacle. Hawthorn have blood on their hands.

They should've been stripped of draft picks. They are an arrogant, *******-driven, horribly racist organisation (having appointed one as a president in the past mind you) then work with the AFL equally responsible for ******* up this s**t even more.

Clarkson should feel betrayed. I would. Imagine your whole tenure at a footy club tarnished by what transpired the last year or so. What an absolute mess.

And how convenient that the instant Clarko is owed his final year contract payout, this stuff comes out. It's almost like Jeff Kennett the absolute s**t stain of a human being decided to give him another stress-inducing period so severe it pulled him away from the game.

How can someone get away with that?

This. What an arrogant racist sh**stain of a football club.

 

[andana]

Most of these investigations, reviews, royal commissions go the same way.

We are committed to ................

We have found no wrongdoing etc.......

We have initiated......... and are committed to improve.

If you are lucky you get an attractive women in a nifty suit to explain it all away.
I believe James Hardie initiated this .

 

[The Brady Bunch]

I'm still so sickened by this whole thing.

How that club got away with this whole mess with just throwing money at things is an absolute disgrace.

Clarkson will never be the same human he once was before this whole debacle. Hawthorn have blood on their hands.

They should've been stripped of draft picks. They are an arrogant, *******-driven, horribly racist organisation (having appointed one as a president in the past mind you) then work with the AFL equally responsible for ******* up this s**t even more.

Clarkson should feel betrayed. I would. Imagine your whole tenure at a footy club tarnished by what transpired the last year or so. What an absolute mess.

And how convenient that the instant Clarko is owed his final year contract payout, this stuff comes out. It's almost like Jeff Kennett the absolute s**t stain of a human being decided to give him another stress-inducing period so severe it pulled him away from the game.

How can someone get away with that?

Agree with everything except the "almost as if" part.

 

[hsquid]

What did North do to deserve the last 8.5 years of agony, post the 10-1 start in 2016 until now?

Pre-payment for what is to come.

 

[Del191229]

How can someone get away with that?

He won't.

 

[Del191229]

But yeah it's pretty weird to have such a mirrored situation. Hoping for a speedy recovery for Mitchell.

A full recovery sure, let's not go overboard with the "speedy" imo.

I'd like it to drag into the season proper and derail them, make them get a stand in senior coach etc.

Perhaps Brett Ratten, who is back there now.

But certainly a full recovery in good time.

 

[sutcliffe's hotel]

North v Hawthorn should be one of the biggest rivalries in footy.

Partly ruined by constantly playing on the South Island.

Hopefully, as we rise and roar, the rivalry builds.

 

[Del191229]

ABC lawyers on wrong side of racial/political decision shocker.

 

[DuckYeah]

ABC lawyers on wrong side of racial/political decision shocker.

I find that article a very subjective bias view.

 

[DuckYeah]

ABC lawyers on wrong side of racial/political decision shocker.

Antoinette Lattouf was sacked three days into a short-term radio-hosting contract with the ABC because she shared a controversial social media post, the public broadcaster says in denying allegations her race or political opinion played a role in her departure.
In its response to Lattouf’s Fair Work claim, the ABC filed a legal defence, describing her application as “fundamentally and entirely misconceived”.

The ABC says Antoinette Lattouf was asked not to present her final two shifts following a controversial post to her Instagram page.CREDIT: MARIJA ERCEGOVAC
The ABC rejected Lattouf’s unlawful termination claim, arguing she was directed not to post about “matters of controversy” during her five-day contract while covering the mornings show on ABC Radio Sydney in December. The broadcaster says she failed or refused to comply with this directive.
The post in question was a Human Rights Watch report reposted by Lattouf on the afternoon of December 19, two days into her five-day contract. The ABC also denied any involvement from managing director David Anderson in the decision to remove her.

The ABC says any political opinion expressed by Lattouf during her contracted period, or any matters relating to her race and national extraction/social origin were “entirely irrelevant” in its decision.
“The suggestion that the ABC took action against the applicant on the basis of her race, national extraction or social origin is abhorrent,” the ABC says in its response.

The events according to the ABC​

The ABC alleges in court documents that there was a phone conversation between station content director Elizabeth Green and Lattouf after her first show on Monday, December 18, during which Lattouf was informed that several complaints had been received with concerns raised over her presence on the channel and her perceived stance on the ongoing conflict in Gaza.
Lattouf was directed by Green not to post anything on her social media accounts that could be considered “controversial”, to avoid any perception of bias for the four remaining days of her contract as presenter of Sydney ‘mornings’.

Lattouf sought to clarify what would be appropriate to post the following day, the ABC claims, with a conversation between Lattouf and Green. The ABC claims Lattouf said words to the effect of: “What can I post? What if another journalist dies, can I post that?”
Green is alleged to have responded: “Well that would be fact-based. But really it’s probably better that you don’t post anything while you’re with us because of the risk of the perception that you are biased and not balanced.”

The post made by Antoinette Lattouf on December 19 which was deemed to be relating to a controversial topic.
At midday on December 20, the ABC became aware of a post made to Lattouf’s Instagram account the previous day. The post included a link to a Human Rights Watch video, with a comment “HRW reporting starvation as a tool of war” attached.
The ABC says it was of “serious concern” that Lattouf had posted about a “controversial topic” after being specifically directed otherwise.

Despite the broadcaster having deemed this post controversial in nature, it also covered the report in question twice that same week.
On December 18, the ABC News online posted an article with the headline: “Israel-Gaza war: Human Rights Watch says starvation is being used as ‘a weapon of war’ by the Israeli government”.

ABC chair Ita Buttrose with managing director David Anderson.CREDIT: DOMINIC LORRIMER
On December 20, ABC News Breakfast on ABC TV interviewed Omar Shakir from Human Rights Watch on the subject of the report, republished online with the headline: “VIDEO: Human Rights Watch accuses Israel of weaponising starvation in Gaza”.
According to court documents, the application alleges that a meeting between ABC chief content officer Chris Oliver-Taylor, head of audio content Ben Latimer, editorial director Simon Melkman and the acting head of the ABC’s capital city network, Steve Ahern, resulted in Oliver-Taylor taking the view Lattouf was in breach of the directive she was given and was subsequently not required to return for her final two shifts.

Loading
Leaked WhatsApp messages obtained by this masthead show a co-ordinated letter-writing campaign from pro-Israel lobbyists directly targeting Anderson and the corporation’s chair Ita Buttrose in the week commencing December 18 in an attempt to get Lattouf dismissed.
In the chain of messages, correspondence from Buttrose was shared, confirming on the morning of December 20 that Oliver-Taylor was addressing complaints lodged by members of the Lawyers for Israel WhatsApp group.
An ABC spokesperson said the broadcaster has “a transparent complaints process and responds accordingly, regardless of the source of the complaint”.
The ABC also denies Anderson was involved in the decision, and rejects the claim in Lattouf’s application she was told Anderson was behind the decision.

The ABC alleges that in an attempt to comfort Lattouf, Green said words to the effect of “these types of matters are taken very seriously and decisions like this can be referred all the way up to the MD’s office”.
Lattouf’s legal team is seeking a detailed public apology, compensation for harm to her reputation, distress and humiliation. Lattouf will also seek an order that the ABC offer her a commensurate role back on air.
The ABC claims Lattouf was paid for all five shifts, and therefore suffered no financial loss.
Lattouf and her lawyer, Josh Bornstein, declined to comment.

 

[DuckYeah]

ABC lawyers on wrong side of racial/political decision shocker.

This israel vs Palestinian shit has no side. There is literally no side to barrack for. They’re both scumbags.

 

[The Nostradamus]

When is our guys big pay day from
Hawks date?

 

[Samsquanch]

Antoinette Lattouf was sacked three days into a short-term radio-hosting contract with the ABC because she shared a controversial social media post, the public broadcaster says in denying allegations her race or political opinion played a role in her departure.
In its response to Lattouf’s Fair Work claim, the ABC filed a legal defence, describing her application as “fundamentally and entirely misconceived”.

The ABC says Antoinette Lattouf was asked not to present her final two shifts following a controversial post to her Instagram page.CREDIT: MARIJA ERCEGOVAC
The ABC rejected Lattouf’s unlawful termination claim, arguing she was directed not to post about “matters of controversy” during her five-day contract while covering the mornings show on ABC Radio Sydney in December. The broadcaster says she failed or refused to comply with this directive.
The post in question was a Human Rights Watch report reposted by Lattouf on the afternoon of December 19, two days into her five-day contract. The ABC also denied any involvement from managing director David Anderson in the decision to remove her.

The ABC says any political opinion expressed by Lattouf during her contracted period, or any matters relating to her race and national extraction/social origin were “entirely irrelevant” in its decision.
“The suggestion that the ABC took action against the applicant on the basis of her race, national extraction or social origin is abhorrent,” the ABC says in its response.

The events according to the ABC​

The ABC alleges in court documents that there was a phone conversation between station content director Elizabeth Green and Lattouf after her first show on Monday, December 18, during which Lattouf was informed that several complaints had been received with concerns raised over her presence on the channel and her perceived stance on the ongoing conflict in Gaza.
Lattouf was directed by Green not to post anything on her social media accounts that could be considered “controversial”, to avoid any perception of bias for the four remaining days of her contract as presenter of Sydney ‘mornings’.

Lattouf sought to clarify what would be appropriate to post the following day, the ABC claims, with a conversation between Lattouf and Green. The ABC claims Lattouf said words to the effect of: “What can I post? What if another journalist dies, can I post that?”
Green is alleged to have responded: “Well that would be fact-based. But really it’s probably better that you don’t post anything while you’re with us because of the risk of the perception that you are biased and not balanced.”

The post made by Antoinette Lattouf on December 19 which was deemed to be relating to a controversial topic.
At midday on December 20, the ABC became aware of a post made to Lattouf’s Instagram account the previous day. The post included a link to a Human Rights Watch video, with a comment “HRW reporting starvation as a tool of war” attached.
The ABC says it was of “serious concern” that Lattouf had posted about a “controversial topic” after being specifically directed otherwise.

Despite the broadcaster having deemed this post controversial in nature, it also covered the report in question twice that same week.
On December 18, the ABC News online posted an article with the headline: “Israel-Gaza war: Human Rights Watch says starvation is being used as ‘a weapon of war’ by the Israeli government”.

ABC chair Ita Buttrose with managing director David Anderson.CREDIT: DOMINIC LORRIMER
On December 20, ABC News Breakfast on ABC TV interviewed Omar Shakir from Human Rights Watch on the subject of the report, republished online with the headline: “VIDEO: Human Rights Watch accuses Israel of weaponising starvation in Gaza”.
According to court documents, the application alleges that a meeting between ABC chief content officer Chris Oliver-Taylor, head of audio content Ben Latimer, editorial director Simon Melkman and the acting head of the ABC’s capital city network, Steve Ahern, resulted in Oliver-Taylor taking the view Lattouf was in breach of the directive she was given and was subsequently not required to return for her final two shifts.

Loading
Leaked WhatsApp messages obtained by this masthead show a co-ordinated letter-writing campaign from pro-Israel lobbyists directly targeting Anderson and the corporation’s chair Ita Buttrose in the week commencing December 18 in an attempt to get Lattouf dismissed.
In the chain of messages, correspondence from Buttrose was shared, confirming on the morning of December 20 that Oliver-Taylor was addressing complaints lodged by members of the Lawyers for Israel WhatsApp group.
An ABC spokesperson said the broadcaster has “a transparent complaints process and responds accordingly, regardless of the source of the complaint”.
The ABC also denies Anderson was involved in the decision, and rejects the claim in Lattouf’s application she was told Anderson was behind the decision.

The ABC alleges that in an attempt to comfort Lattouf, Green said words to the effect of “these types of matters are taken very seriously and decisions like this can be referred all the way up to the MD’s office”.
Lattouf’s legal team is seeking a detailed public apology, compensation for harm to her reputation, distress and humiliation. Lattouf will also seek an order that the ABC offer her a commensurate role back on air.
The ABC claims Lattouf was paid for all five shifts, and therefore suffered no financial loss.
Lattouf and her lawyer, Josh Bornstein, declined to comment.

Seems like the ABC senior management are under the impression that Scott Morrison is still the PM. Or perhaps Tony Abbott.

 

[DesertRoo]

Antoinette Lattouf was sacked three days into a short-term radio-hosting contract with the ABC because she shared a controversial social media post, the public broadcaster says in denying allegations her race or political opinion played a role in her departure.
In its response to Lattouf’s Fair Work claim, the ABC filed a legal defence, describing her application as “fundamentally and entirely misconceived”.

The ABC says Antoinette Lattouf was asked not to present her final two shifts following a controversial post to her Instagram page.CREDIT: MARIJA ERCEGOVAC
The ABC rejected Lattouf’s unlawful termination claim, arguing she was directed not to post about “matters of controversy” during her five-day contract while covering the mornings show on ABC Radio Sydney in December. The broadcaster says she failed or refused to comply with this directive.
The post in question was a Human Rights Watch report reposted by Lattouf on the afternoon of December 19, two days into her five-day contract. The ABC also denied any involvement from managing director David Anderson in the decision to remove her.

The ABC says any political opinion expressed by Lattouf during her contracted period, or any matters relating to her race and national extraction/social origin were “entirely irrelevant” in its decision.
“The suggestion that the ABC took action against the applicant on the basis of her race, national extraction or social origin is abhorrent,” the ABC says in its response.

The events according to the ABC​

The ABC alleges in court documents that there was a phone conversation between station content director Elizabeth Green and Lattouf after her first show on Monday, December 18, during which Lattouf was informed that several complaints had been received with concerns raised over her presence on the channel and her perceived stance on the ongoing conflict in Gaza.
Lattouf was directed by Green not to post anything on her social media accounts that could be considered “controversial”, to avoid any perception of bias for the four remaining days of her contract as presenter of Sydney ‘mornings’.

Lattouf sought to clarify what would be appropriate to post the following day, the ABC claims, with a conversation between Lattouf and Green. The ABC claims Lattouf said words to the effect of: “What can I post? What if another journalist dies, can I post that?”
Green is alleged to have responded: “Well that would be fact-based. But really it’s probably better that you don’t post anything while you’re with us because of the risk of the perception that you are biased and not balanced.”

The post made by Antoinette Lattouf on December 19 which was deemed to be relating to a controversial topic.
At midday on December 20, the ABC became aware of a post made to Lattouf’s Instagram account the previous day. The post included a link to a Human Rights Watch video, with a comment “HRW reporting starvation as a tool of war” attached.
The ABC says it was of “serious concern” that Lattouf had posted about a “controversial topic” after being specifically directed otherwise.

Despite the broadcaster having deemed this post controversial in nature, it also covered the report in question twice that same week.
On December 18, the ABC News online posted an article with the headline: “Israel-Gaza war: Human Rights Watch says starvation is being used as ‘a weapon of war’ by the Israeli government”.

ABC chair Ita Buttrose with managing director David Anderson.CREDIT: DOMINIC LORRIMER
On December 20, ABC News Breakfast on ABC TV interviewed Omar Shakir from Human Rights Watch on the subject of the report, republished online with the headline: “VIDEO: Human Rights Watch accuses Israel of weaponising starvation in Gaza”.
According to court documents, the application alleges that a meeting between ABC chief content officer Chris Oliver-Taylor, head of audio content Ben Latimer, editorial director Simon Melkman and the acting head of the ABC’s capital city network, Steve Ahern, resulted in Oliver-Taylor taking the view Lattouf was in breach of the directive she was given and was subsequently not required to return for her final two shifts.

Loading
Leaked WhatsApp messages obtained by this masthead show a co-ordinated letter-writing campaign from pro-Israel lobbyists directly targeting Anderson and the corporation’s chair Ita Buttrose in the week commencing December 18 in an attempt to get Lattouf dismissed.
In the chain of messages, correspondence from Buttrose was shared, confirming on the morning of December 20 that Oliver-Taylor was addressing complaints lodged by members of the Lawyers for Israel WhatsApp group.
An ABC spokesperson said the broadcaster has “a transparent complaints process and responds accordingly, regardless of the source of the complaint”.
The ABC also denies Anderson was involved in the decision, and rejects the claim in Lattouf’s application she was told Anderson was behind the decision.

The ABC alleges that in an attempt to comfort Lattouf, Green said words to the effect of “these types of matters are taken very seriously and decisions like this can be referred all the way up to the MD’s office”.
Lattouf’s legal team is seeking a detailed public apology, compensation for harm to her reputation, distress and humiliation. Lattouf will also seek an order that the ABC offer her a commensurate role back on air.
The ABC claims Lattouf was paid for all five shifts, and therefore suffered no financial loss.
Lattouf and her lawyer, Josh Bornstein, declined to comment.

green mistakes controversial with uncomfortable.

Reposting HRW isn’t a controversial topic, it’s an uncomfortable one.

 

[DuckYeah]

Seems like the ABC senior management are under the impression that Scott Morrison is still the PM. Or perhaps Tony Abbott.

I dont believe the ABC are wrong in their stance. I have spent many hours down both rabbit holes trying to gain understanding. I have understanding and their conflict is so complex, that neither country deserves any support from anyone. The political persuasion without proper discourse is dangerous. The ABC aren’t pro anyone. Its just unfortunate Israel have a more powerful military.

War is shit, all wars. But IMO, there is no political stance. Its conflict between 2 states that have absolutely notjing to do with Australia.

All the rhetoric, the protests will fall of deaf ears here. Its pointless and borders propaganda. Just get rid of it.

 

[DuckYeah]

When is our guys big pay day from
Hawks date?

He got one in 2023. 800k to do absolutely **** nothing all

 

[travelli]

I dont believe the ABC are wrong in their stance. I have spent many hours down both rabbit holes trying to gain understanding. I have understanding and their conflict is so complex, that neither country deserves any support from anyone. The political persuasion without proper discourse is dangerous. The ABC aren’t pro anyone. Its just unfortunate Israel have a more powerful military.

War is s**t, all wars. But IMO, there is no political stance. Its conflict between 2 states that have absolutely notjing to do with Australia.

All the rhetoric, the protests will fall of deaf ears here. Its pointless and borders propaganda. Just get rid of it.

I think the ABC is wrong. All Australian coverage has been biased. No one has a clue about the Gaza perspective anymore, because Israel has locked down all communications. Lattouf gets black listed for trying to offer an alternative viewpoint (a mild one at that) and gets hounded out by a Jewish lobby group. It's a disgrace.

I think she will get her job back and then watch out, journalists might be empowered to give an alternative viewpoint.

 

[The Nostradamus]

He got one in 2023. 800k to do absolutely * nothing all

Yeah I’m not referring to that one

He’s about to get another

 

[DesertRoo]

I dont believe the ABC are wrong in their stance. I have spent many hours down both rabbit holes trying to gain understanding. I have understanding and their conflict is so complex, that neither country deserves any support from anyone. The political persuasion without proper discourse is dangerous. The ABC aren’t pro anyone. Its just unfortunate Israel have a more powerful military.

War is s**t, all wars. But IMO, there is no political stance. Its conflict between 2 states that have absolutely notjing to do with Australia.

All the rhetoric, the protests will fall of deaf ears here. Its pointless and borders propaganda. Just get rid of it.

Taking the noncommittal stance whilst genocide is being committed?

Something something, good men?

 

[DuckYeah]

I think the ABC is wrong. All Australian coverage has been biased. No one has a clue about the Gaza perspective anymore, because Israel has locked down all communications. Lattouf gets black listed for trying to offer an alternative viewpoint (a mild one at that) and gets hounded out by a Jewish lobby group. It's a disgrace.

I think she will get her job back and then watch out, journalists might be empowered to give an alternative viewpoint.

Oh settle down. Im not getting into a debate over this. Its pointless. Have a look at both sides. Hamas (the government of Gaza) who are backed by the people of Palest… dont worry mate. Its best we leave it here. Both are campaigners and thats it